Multicentre multi-device hybrid imaging study of coronary artery disease: results from the EValuation of INtegrated Cardiac Imaging for the Detection and Characterization of Ischaemic Heart Disease (EVINCI) hybrid imaging population

AIMS: Hybrid imaging provides a non-invasive assessment of coronary anatomy and myocardial perfusion. We sought to evaluate the added clinical value of hybrid imaging in a multi-centre multi-vendor setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fourteen centres enrolled 252 patients with stable angina and intermediate (20-90%) pre-test likelihood of coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS), CT coronary angiography (CTCA), and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) with fractional flow reserve (FFR). Hybrid MPS/CTCA images were obtained by 3D image fusion. Blinded core-lab analyses were performed for CTCA, MPS, QCA and hybrid datasets. Hemodynamically significant CAD was ruled-in non-invasively in the presence of a matched finding (myocardial perfusion defect co-localized with stenosed coronary artery) and ruled-out with normal findings (both CTCA and MPS normal). Overall prevalence of significant CAD on QCA (>70% stenosis or 30-70% with FFR 640.80) was 37%. Of 1004 pathological myocardial segments on MPS, 246 (25%) were reclassified from their standard coronary distribution to another territory by hybrid imaging. In this respect, in 45/252 (18%) patients, hybrid imaging reassigned an entire perfusion defect to another coronary territory, changing the final diagnosis in 42% of the cases. Hybrid imaging allowed non-invasive CAD rule-out in 41%, and rule-in in 24% of patients, with a negative and positive predictive value of 88% and 87%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In patients at intermediate risk of CAD, hybrid imaging allows non-invasive co-localization of myocardial perfusion defects and subtending coronary arteries, impacting clinical decision-making in almost one every five subjects

Comparative effectiveness of initial computed tomography and invasive coronary angiography in women and men with stable chest pain and suspected coronary artery disease: multicentre randomised trial

To assess the comparative effectiveness of computed tomography and invasive coronary angiography in women and men with stable chest pain suspected to be caused by coronary artery disease

Computed tomography versus invasive coronary angiography:design and methods of the pragmatic randomised multicentre DISCHARGE trial

Objectives: More than 3.5 million invasive coronary angiographies (ICA) are performed in Europe annually. Approximately 2 million of these invasive procedures might be reduced by noninvasive tests because no coronary intervention is performed. Computed tomography (CT) is the most accurate noninvasive test for detection and exclusion of coronary artery disease (CAD). To investigate the comparative effectiveness of CT and ICA, we designed the European pragmatic multicentre DISCHARGE trial funded by the 7th Framework Programme of the European Union (EC-GA 603266). Methods: In this trial, patients with a low-to-intermediate pretest probability (10–60 %) of suspected CAD and a clinical indication for ICA because of stable chest pain will be randomised in a 1-to-1 ratio to CT or ICA. CT and ICA findings guide subsequent management decisions by the local heart teams according to current evidence and European guidelines. Results: Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and stroke as a composite endpoint will be the primary outcome measure. Secondary and other outcomes include cost-effectiveness, radiation exposure, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), socioeconomic status, lifestyle, adverse events related to CT/ICA, and gender differences. Conclusions: The DISCHARGE trial will assess the comparative effectiveness of CT and ICA. Key Points: • Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. • Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the reference standard for detection of CAD. • Noninvasive computed tomography angiography excludes CAD with high sensitivity. • CT may effectively reduce the approximately 2 million negative ICAs in Europe. • DISCHARGE addresses this hypothesis in patients with low-to-intermediate pretest probability for CAD.</p

Detection of significant coronary artery disease by noninvasive anatomical and functional imaging.

BACKGROUND The choice of imaging techniques in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) varies between countries, regions, and hospitals. This prospective, multicenter, comparative effectiveness study was designed to assess the relative accuracy of commonly used imaging techniques for identifying patients with significant CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 475 patients with stable chest pain and intermediate likelihood of CAD underwent coronary computed tomographic angiography and stress myocardial perfusion imaging by single photon emission computed tomography or positron emission tomography, and ventricular wall motion imaging by stress echocardiography or cardiac magnetic resonance. If ≥1 test was abnormal, patients underwent invasive coronary angiography. Significant CAD was defined by invasive coronary angiography as >50% stenosis of the left main stem, >70% stenosis in a major coronary vessel, or 30% to 70% stenosis with fractional flow reserve ≤0.8. Significant CAD was present in 29% of patients. In a patient-based analysis, coronary computed tomographic angiography had the highest diagnostic accuracy, the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve being 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.88-0.94), sensitivity being 91%, and specificity being 92%. Myocardial perfusion imaging had good diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve, 0.74; confidence interval, 0.69-0.78), sensitivity 74%, and specificity 73%. Wall motion imaging had similar accuracy (area under the curve, 0.70; confidence interval, 0.65-0.75) but lower sensitivity (49%, P<0.001) and higher specificity (92%, P<0.001). The diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging and wall motion imaging were lower than that of coronary computed tomographic angiography (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS In a multicenter European population of patients with stable chest pain and low prevalence of CAD, coronary computed tomographic angiography is more accurate than noninvasive functional testing for detecting significant CAD defined invasively. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00979199

Computed Tomography Versus Invasive Coronary Angiography in Patients With Diabetes and Suspected Coronary Artery Disease

Objective: To compare cardiac computed tomography (CT) with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the initial strategy in patients with diabetes and stable chest pain. Research design and methods: This prespecified analysis of the multicenter DISCHARGE trial in 16 European countries was performed in patients with stable chest pain and intermediate pretest probability of coronary artery disease. The primary end point was a major adverse cardiac event (MACE) (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stroke), and the secondary end point was expanded MACE (including transient ischemic attacks and major procedure-related complications). Results: Follow-up at a median of 3.5 years was available in 3,541 patients of whom 557 (CT group n = 263 vs. ICA group n = 294) had diabetes and 2,984 (CT group n = 1,536 vs. ICA group n = 1,448) did not. No statistically significant diabetes interaction was found for MACE (P = 0.45), expanded MACE (P = 0.35), or major procedure-related complications (P = 0.49). In both patients with and without diabetes, the rate of MACE did not differ between CT and ICA groups. In patients with diabetes, the expanded MACE end point occurred less frequently in the CT group than in the ICA group (3.8% [10 of 263] vs. 8.2% [24 of 294], hazard ratio [HR] 0.45 [95% CI 0.22-0.95]), as did the major procedure-related complication rate (0.4% [1 of 263] vs. 2.7% [8 of 294], HR 0.30 [95% CI 0.13 - 0.63]). Conclusions: In patients with diabetes referred for ICA for the investigation of stable chest pain, a CT-first strategy compared with an ICA-first strategy showed no difference in MACE and may potentially be associated with a lower rate of expanded MACE and major procedure-related complications

CT or invasive coronary angiography in stable chest pain

Background: In the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), computed tomography (CT) is an accurate, noninvasive alternative to invasive coronary angiography (ICA). However, the comparative effectiveness of CT and ICA in the management of CAD to reduce the frequency of major adverse cardiovascular events is uncertain. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, randomized trial comparing CT with ICA as initial diagnostic imaging strategies for guiding the treatment of patients with stable chest pain who had an intermediate pretest probability of obstructive CAD and were referred for ICA at one of 26 European centers. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) over 3.5 years. Key secondary outcomes were procedure-related complications and angina pectoris. Results: Among 3561 patients (56.2% of whom were women), follow-up was complete for 3523 (98.9%). Major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 38 of 1808 patients (2.1%) in the CT group and in 52 of 1753 (3.0%) in the ICA group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 1.07; P=0.10). Major procedure-related complications occurred in 9 patients (0.5%) in the CT group and in 33 (1.9%) in the ICA group (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.55). Angina during the final 4 weeks of follow-up was reported in 8.8% of the patients in the CT group and in 7.5% of those in the ICA group (odds ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.48). Conclusions: Among patients referred for ICA because of stable chest pain and intermediate pretest probability of CAD, the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was similar in the CT group and the ICA group. The frequency of major procedure-related complications was lower with an initial CT strategy. (Funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Program and others; DISCHARGE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02400229

Age and computed tomography and invasive coronary angiography in stable chest pain: a prespecified secondary analysis of the discharge randomized clinical trial

Importance: The effectiveness and safety of computed tomography (CT) and invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in different age groups is unknown. Objective: To determine the association of age with outcomes of CT and ICA in patients with stable chest pain. Design, Setting, and Participants: The assessor-blinded Diagnostic Imaging Strategies for Patients With Stable Chest Pain and Intermediate Risk of Coronary Artery Disease (DISCHARGE) randomized clinical trial was conducted between October 2015 and April 2019 in 26 European centers. Patients referred for ICA with stable chest pain and an intermediate probability of obstructive coronary artery disease were analyzed in an intention-to-treat analysis. Data were analyzed from July 2022 to January 2023. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to a CT-first strategy or a direct-to-ICA strategy. Main Outcomes and Measures: MACE (ie, cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stroke) and major procedure-related complications. The primary prespecified outcome of this secondary analysis of age was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at a median follow-up of 3.5 years. Results: Among 3561 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.1 [10.1] years; 2002 female [56.2%]), 2360 (66.3%) were younger than 65 years, 982 (27.6%) were between ages 65 to 75 years, and 219 (6.1%) were older than 75 years. The primary outcome was MACE at a median (IQR) follow-up of 3.5 (2.9-4.2) years for 3523 patients (99%). Modeling age as a continuous variable, age, and randomization group were not associated with MACE (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.98-1.07; P for interaction = .31). Age and randomization group were associated with major procedure-related complications (odds ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.05-1.27; P for interaction = .005), which were lower in younger patients. Conclusions and Relevance: Age did not modify the effect of randomization group on the primary outcome of MACE but did modify the effect on major procedure-related complications. Results suggest that CT was associated with a lower risk of major procedure-related complications in younger patients